Winter 2019-2020 Discussion

[ORH_wxman]

22 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

We have always had ENSO events that have deviated from the norm...hell, just 5 years ago we had a weak el nino behave pretty much as expected.

I think the gradient saturation may become a more prevalent issue, but its difficult to say just how prominent and whether other factors could countermand its influence.

The field as a whole tends to overreact to the most recent events. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, there was a lot of stuff coming out how global warming was causing more +AO/+NAO conditions due to the PJ retreating north and intensifying/enhancing the vortex near the pole. 

Then by about 2011, the reverse started showing up...Arctic amplification was causing huge NAO blocking and massive "warm Arctic, cold continent" winter patterns and prolonged PV invasions due to "wavy jet" theory. This persisted for a while and now we're starting to see some new narratives like the enhanced subtropical ridging due to Hadley cell expansion, etc. To me, it's mostly flavor of the month. It's not that the theories are wrong, it's just that each variable seems to get too much credit during the seasons where the effects are most noticeable. 

[Ginx snewx]

Will and Ray having babies in 19 about as good a  correlation to an epic winter as there is. Lalalallockitup

[Typhoon Tip]

11 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Probably has some merit, but like everything else, its overstated and not always that simple. Last season, that was correct.....other years, it wasn't as much of an issue. Maybe it is a more prominent issue moving forward as climo evolves, but we have seen seasons in the not so distant past become really blocking prone.

Nope... not likely... 

The physics is not over stated ... unless you mean something else... if so forget this. Otherwise -

Gradient drives the whole thing...   period.   You have potassium and sodium in your cells ...that provides an electrical potential... that is a gradient.  You have gravity that increases from one point to the other ...which is also describe by the sloped curvature tensor of space ..  that is a gradient.   You have pressure variance in the atmosphere ... created by warm and cool differences from one point/air mass region to the next... that is a gradient.  Nature is gradients... The Cosmos is gradients.... The fact that you can read this ...is accessing the electrical potential gradient.   

IF A travels to B.... ( i.e., gradient) and you have A and A.... A is not traveling to A....   That is what is meant by warm ocean under warm atmosphere...  Warm ENSO is based upon 300 years of climatological norms... But the norms are changing... so the "warm" characteristic of the ENSO is ...not as warm, but cannot really be ascertained very readily because it's an acceleration -  And so the bevy of known correlations logically must change because of the break-down of those governing environmental relationships.

that's what we're talking about... 

Again, as I stated... if we can use physics to demonstrate gradient exists ...  we can bet with higher confidence then/there is when/where we will see a responses in the system, because those responses are in fact precipitated out of the movement from A to B in this context/example.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

I for one believe that in the absence of GW ... perpetually ballooning the mid and lower latitudes, we'd be getting harsh winters for the next couple-a decades...   

I think that ENSO is being muted ...but not entirely - just mitigated by some to-be-determined physically amount ... If it gets sufficiently hot to really differentiate again, more akin to 100+ years ago... fine - go nuts! Otherwise, it's pallid effect on the global circulation may become more commonplace.  But we have to think the Earth's atmosphere in the "Hadley cells" ...  The tropical/equatorial SST regions that are associated with ENSO and so forth...those are differentiating against the subtropical termination region that flows into the westerlies in the mid latitude winters(s) ( N/S hemi.)...  Those then R-wave distribute and there's your forcing mechanics on a larger scale.. But, if that interaction region is being less differentiated ( i.e., gradient reduced) said forcing takes a back-er seat... 

However, there is still the AO ( and AAO) cold source/domain regions to consider ... Albeit warming, they still deeply differentiate against the whole region S of ~ the 40th parallel(s) ...and that is why the westerlies' cores are screaming... 

I really think we should get used to this above sort of layout the majority of times until ... further notice/decades...  It won't be that way at all times...no, but favored to be... Where we have faster geopotential balanced wind fields and stress imposed from larger to smaller scale wave mechanics...   

I would strongly suggest tailoring seasonal outlooks around these ideas ...certainly enter them into consideration. 

[ma blizzard]

prob won't be enough to see a measurable impact, but there has been some ~VE4ish eruptions (Ulawun 2x, Raikoke ) over the past couple months that have injected SO2 into the stratosphere 

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 8/9/2019 at 12:45 AM, ORH_wxman said:

The field as a whole tends to overreact to the most recent events. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, there was a lot of stuff coming out how global warming was causing more +AO/+NAO conditions due to the PJ retreating north and intensifying/enhancing the vortex near the pole. 

Then by about 2011, the reverse started showing up...Arctic amplification was causing huge NAO blocking and massive "warm Arctic, cold continent" winter patterns and prolonged PV invasions due to "wavy jet" theory. This persisted for a while and now we're starting to see some new narratives like the enhanced subtropical ridging due to Hadley cell expansion, etc. To me, it's mostly flavor of the month. It's not that the theories are wrong, it's just that each variable seems to get too much credit during the seasons where the effects are most noticeable. 

Exactly. The recency bias. I'm not doubting the physics of what he is saying, but rather the degree to which it will be relevent moving forward, or the magnitude of the impact that it may have. 

Didn't hear much about this in March 2018, did we...aside from those telling me that winter was over and I was wrong about epic March blocking in February, while it was 70.

As I stated my the winter review, I think the placement of the SSW really played a big role in mitigating last winter, while it saved the previous one. Like ENSO events, placement and timing is every bit as important as intensity. I'm learning this the hard way like the rest of us.

We had sufficient blocking in early December, when we failed to cash in, and it is no cooincidence that it abated when it did. The SSW has a ripple effect, and it doesn't always mean snow in sne.

On 8/9/2019 at 11:06 AM, Typhoon Tip said:

Nope... not likely... 

The physics is not over stated ... unless you mean something else... if so forget this. Otherwise -

Gradient drives the whole thing...   period.   You have potassium and sodium in your cells ...that provides an electrical potential... that is a gradient.  You have gravity that increases from one point to the other ...which is also describe by the sloped curvature tensor of space ..  that is a gradient.   You have pressure variance in the atmosphere ... created by warm and cool differences from one point/air mass region to the next... that is a gradient.  Nature is gradients... The Cosmos is gradients.... The fact that you can read this ...is accessing the electrical potential gradient.   

IF A travels to B.... ( i.e., gradient) and you have A and A.... A is not traveling to A....   That is what is meant by warm ocean under warm atmosphere...  Warm ENSO is based upon 300 years of climatological norms... But the norms are changing... so the "warm" characteristic of the ENSO is ...not as warm, but cannot really be ascertained very readily because it's an acceleration -  And so the bevy of known correlations logically must change because of the break-down of those governing environmental relationships.

that's what we're talking about... 

Again, as I stated... if we can use physics to demonstrate gradient exists ...  we can bet with higher confidence then/there is when/where we will see a responses in the system, because those responses are in fact precipitated out of the movement from A to B in this context/example.

 

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 8/9/2019 at 8:16 AM, Ginx snewx said:

Will and Ray having babies in 19 about as good a  correlation to an epic winter as there is. Lalalallockitup

I think its even more so a solid indicator of just how uneventful last winter was.

I know that if I were married in Feb 2015, my wife would not be due this fall.

[40/70 Benchmark]

SSW are oversimplified like most atmospheric phenomena. We are conditioned as a cohort of global weather enthusiasts to take our pants off whenever a SSW is modeled and Pavlov is laughing in his grave.

[40/70 Benchmark]

14 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

SSW are oversimplified like most atmospheric phenomena. We are conditioned as a cohort of global weather enthusiasts to take our pants off whenever a SSW is modeled and Pavlov is laughing in his grave.

Same way I got excited about a weak el nino during the fall of 2006....oops. SSW have varied regional impacts, as well.

Maybe its just me, but I'd rather make efforts to properly diagnose complex phenomena such as ENSO and SSW, rather than predict less snow every season due to increased gradients and call it a day. Statistically speaking, the seasonal snowfall data during the past 25 years of constricting gradients further buttresses this notion.

[Ginx snewx]

50 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think its even more so a solid indicator of just how uneventful last winter was.

I know that if I were married in Feb 2015, my wife would not be due this fall.

Exact oppo here, my son was conceived Feb 6 1978 in a TSSN.

[CoastalWx]

My point was only to the fact that in prior times, La Niña and El Niño were pronounced features.  Now, the whole pacific is warm. Is going to have an effect on MJO propagation which is big in certain ENSO events.  I’m just speculating. However, I think it is an interesting question. Maybe it doesn’t matter.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

My point was only to the fact that in prior times, La Niña and El Niño were pronounced features.  Now, the whole pacific is warm. Is going to have an effect on MJO propagation which is big in certain ENSO events.  I’m just speculating. However, I think it is an interesting question. Maybe it doesn’t matter.

I'm not trying to say that it doesn't matter...everything does. The fun is figuringt out impact. I don't think its as simple as assuming gradient saturation and cyclogen underperformance.

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 hour ago, Ginx snewx said:

Exact oppo here, my son was conceived Feb 6 1978 in a TSSN.

Dude, I wouldn't touch her with thundersnow ongoing.

[Typhoon Tip]

Just imho but I'm not sure we can really disconnect the state of the hemispheric gradient distribution, from "how" ENSO can trigger/forcing ... You can't.  Gradient is the trigger.. without it... no response.

Scott is correct ... a warm overall basin elevates the thresholds, beyond which forcing kicks in... because the gradient is too weak... and as such, the mid latitudes/westerlies are not as sensitive to modest ENSO deviations..

 
 

 

 

 

[dendrite]

It's like when you look out in the deep extended at H5 anomalies and weak trough signals show up as neutral or slightly AN heights.

[Typhoon Tip]

35 minutes ago, dendrite said:

It's like when you look out in the deep extended at H5 anomalies and weak trough signals show up as neutral or slightly AN heights.

that's not a bad way to look at it actually ...  but at all scales and dimension in the thing.  We see +2 ENSO... budda boom budda bing

WRONG

We seem to see shapes and knee-jerk as a species... but the scalar values tell a different story and hide demons - haha.  Looks can be deceiving.. 

You know,  it's still not abundantly clear to me how and how much the SST anomalies are being weighted... If it is more so against the 100 year?  ...200 ....500 via reanalysis techniques..   30-year slide?  Even if 30 year, which in practice is more contemporaneously relevant ... the climate appears to be on such a hockey-stick acceleration that even that is dubiously comparative.   I mean ...+1 relative to 20 years ago may totally f-up that assumption... we don't know.  And AMS is cagey about disseminating paper abstracts - ...or, no one cares and the world's gone mad!  which it has anyway ...but I digress...

 

[ORH_wxman]

The lack of gradient between enso region and the rest of the PAC shouldn't be a new norm unless there is a distinct reason to believe that the rest of the PAC is going to have an underlying warming that is greater in magnitude than the ENSO region. The equatorial cold tongue has been an issue in observations vs climate models but the warm pool to the north of there that has set up off western Mexico and out into the central PAC is a newer phenomenon that is unlikely to remain there relative to the rest of the basin and vs ENSO region in the equatorial PAC. 

Of course, maybe it will remain...we don't know for sure...just like we didn't know for sure if the monster blocking of 2009-2013 would remain or the positive NAOs of the late 1990s. Odds are though it will pass onward to something different in a relative sense. 

[Typhoon Tip]

10 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

The lack of gradient between enso region and the rest of the PAC shouldn't be a new norm unless there is a distinct reason to believe that the rest of the PAC is going to have an underlying warming that is greater in magnitude than the ENSO region. The equatorial cold tongue has been an issue in observations vs climate models but the warm pool to the north of there that has set up off western Mexico and out into the central PAC is a newer phenomenon that is unlikely to remain there relative to the rest of the basin and vs ENSO region in the equatorial PAC. 

Of course, maybe it will remain...we don't know for sure...just like we didn't know for sure if the monster blocking of 2009-2013 would remain or the positive NAOs of the late 1990s. Odds are though it will pass onward to something different in a relative sense. 

Mm ...I wanna believe in this ... I happened to think you are a talented dude in the "art" of speculative Meteorological sciences ...

However, much of my own sentiments ( not saying I'm right, per se...I'm just trying to add some credence here a little) is echoed elsewhere by leading climatologists circuited into the Global sort of Zeitgeist if you will...

Take this from Scripps..

"...

Most long-range forecast models predicted a potentially drought-ending deluge in California from the climate pattern known as El Niño in winter 2015-16, but the actual precipitation was far less than expected.

A National Science Foundation-supported study led by climate scientists at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego offers an explanation why.

“Comparing this El Niño to previous strong El Niños, we found big differences in the atmospheric response across the globe, including California,” said Nick Siler, lead author of the study that was published in the Journal of Climate, and a postdoctoral scholar in the research group of co-author Shang-Ping Xie at Scripps. “We found that these differences weren’t all random, but rather were caused by tropical sea-surface temperature anomalies unrelated to El Niño.”

"

This is what bothers me ... That factor, bold right there... I don't believe is a factor that has gone away?  That ... eeee  kinda sorta tries to suggest ...we may be crossing a threshold into a new norm. 

Time will tell.. But this above is precisely what the conclusion I've been coming to ... we lack gradient because the warmer than normal preconditioning, and therefore... didn't seen the responses..

It's only relevant now because ... heh, I don't see how the ENSO going into this year is really going be readily seen as forcing much when we had trouble getting much more than pallid responses from a much more obvious scenario like that. 

interesting ..but keep in mind; we are talking probabilities?  - something(s) can certainly change such that a comparatively weaker signal shows up more... sure... but, even if so, I think the longer termed issue of needing to question the standard correlations needs to be considered.

 

[Ginx snewx]

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Dude, I wouldn't touch her with thundersnow ongoing.

Lol staring out the window versus staring out the window plus

[ORH_wxman]

1 minute ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Mm ...I wanna believe in this ... I happened to think you are a talented dude in the "art" of speculative Meteorological sciences ...

However, much of my own sentiments ( not saying I'm right, per se...I'm just trying to add some credence here a little) is echoed elsewhere by leading climatologists circuited into the Global sort of Zeitgeist if you will...

Take this from Scripps..

"...

Most long-range forecast models predicted a potentially drought-ending deluge in California from the climate pattern known as El Niño in winter 2015-16, but the actual precipitation was far less than expected.

A National Science Foundation-supported study led by climate scientists at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego offers an explanation why.

“Comparing this El Niño to previous strong El Niños, we found big differences in the atmospheric response across the globe, including California,” said Nick Siler, lead author of the study that was published in the Journal of Climate, and a postdoctoral scholar in the research group of co-author Shang-Ping Xie at Scripps. “We found that these differences weren’t all random, but rather were caused by tropical sea-surface temperature anomalies unrelated to El Niño.”

"

This is what bothers me ... That factor, bold right there... I don't believe is a factor that has gone away?  That ... eeee  kinda sorta tries to suggest ...we may be crossing a threshold into a new norm. 

Time will tell.. But this above is precisely what the conclusion I've been coming to ... we lack gradient because the warmer than normal preconditioning, and therefore... didn't seen the responses..

It's only relevant now because ... heh, I don't see how the ENSO going into this year is really going be readily seen as forcing much when we had trouble getting much more than pallid responses from a much more obvious scenario like that. 

interesting

 

Well that differential in SSTs was less in 2016...my comment was that why would we expect it to remain there? 

The gradient is all relative. Is there a reason to expect a hot spot in the central PAC that warms faster than the equatorial PAC on a magnitude that makes the 2016 super Niño less effective? (I.E do we expect the subtropical PAC to continue to warm wayyyy faster than ENSO like we saw between 2013 and 2016?

No probably not. At least that is what most of the literature points to. Of course, we should keep in mind that the literature is not very accurate when it come to differential warming. It can do okay when it comes to the global trends but regional tends to get tougher. So maybe it's a new normal...but I am typically skeptical of claims like that and for good reason. They usually revert back closer to the global trendline. The exception may be the polar regions where ee expect some pretty enhanced trends...and even some wildly reversed trends at times like seen in Antarctica. 

But most of the earth in between seems to ebb and flow with the an underlying warming trend. 

[dendrite]

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Dude, I wouldn't touch her with thundersnow ongoing.

If I ever had a daughter my name of choice was Neve...that is until Lisa found out the meaning. Now it's nixed.

[OSUmetstud]

29 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Lol staring out the window versus staring out the window plus

This sounds a lot like the seinfeld episode where George takes food into bed.

[CoastalWx]

The one thing that has been an ongoing signal and looks to be again in 19-20, is this NPAC ridging. Not sure why, but that has been semi-permanent. Maybe it’s related to tropical forcing, maybe other factors like AGW, or perhaps something where we just throw our hands up and say “ I dunno.”  I find that most interesting. 

[CoastalWx]

As a side note to my earlier comment, pretty sure  I read westerlies in ENSO areas  have been rather persistent and anomalous more than expected last several years. Lack of easterlies. Pretty sure that was it. Might also help explain the Pacific temps too. I’ll have to find it. 

[Typhoon Tip]

Well... in any case... 

I'm sticking with the developing plausibility that we are lacking specific atmospheric responses to underlying SST anomalies ...because the traditional correlations are breaking down due ( most probably ...) to climate change.

But all that is actually less than relevant for this year...  this year's prognostics of the ENSO appears to fall within the < +1 or > -1 neutrality anyway ... effectively making the question of whether there is a response or not, more likely moot. 

The AO may be more negative ... this is suggested by the solar nadir resonance stuff... which won't get into ... But, that means that we deal with huge gradients.   Fast fast fast flow...at times more quelled to moderate more normal...

All that really means is that storms are more sheared and move faster... But in a sort of arithmetic sense... that can also intuit making up for winter storm impacts in the aggregate.  More nickle-dime events ... but you know... "nickle" and "dime" are relative distinctions in them selves, because one thing we are not even considering in these seasonal debates and prognostics is the DEFINITE upward empirically proven increase in precipitation quota that's happened in the last 25 years...  And that ain't measurement techniques so don't even try that...  a 4" mechanical deal in 1990 produces 6" now...just accept that... because the air is - yes according to climate prediction with the change - holding more water vapor.

Oh god... ad nauseam..it gets impossible to do this... to do it right,.. you have to include what everyone chastises like an irreverent scorning mob outside of the Ark -

 

[Ginx snewx]

2 hours ago, OSUmetstud said:

This sounds a lot like the seinfeld episode where George takes food into bed.

Weenieing out while weenieing in

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 8/10/2019 at 6:10 PM, Typhoon Tip said:

Well... in any case... 

I'm sticking with the developing plausibility that we are lacking specific atmospheric responses to underlying SST anomalies ...because the traditional correlations are breaking down due ( most probably ...) to climate change.

But all that is actually less than relevant for this year...  this year's prognostics of the ENSO appears to fall within the < +1 or > -1 neutrality anyway ... effectively making the question of whether there is a response or not, more likely moot. 

The AO may be more negative ... this is suggested by the solar nadir resonance stuff... which won't get into ... But, that means that we deal with huge gradients.   Fast fast fast flow...at times more quelled to moderate more normal...

All that really means is that storms are more sheared and move faster... But in a sort of arithmetic sense... that can also intuit making up for winter storm impacts in the aggregate.  More nickle-dime events ... but you know... "nickle" and "dime" are relative distinctions in them selves, because one thing we are not even considering in these seasonal debates and prognostics is the DEFINITE upward empirically proven increase in precipitation quota that's happened in the last 25 years...  And that ain't measurement techniques so don't even try that...  a 4" mechanical deal in 1990 produces 6" now...just accept that... because the air is - yes according to climate prediction with the change - holding more water vapor.

Oh god... ad nauseam..it gets impossible to do this... to do it right,.. you have to include what everyone chastises like an irreverent scorning mob outside of the Ark -

 

John, how do you explain the increase in snowfall over the past 25 years in the face of the gradient saturation of which you speak that is so inimical to the holy grail events for winter enthusiasts? You think the increase in water vapor to to AGW is enough to off set??

Not trying to be a jerk....serious inquiry...

[CoastalWx]

Boy that's a tough question. If an increase of 1C holds 7% more water vapor and we have been increasing 0.15C-ish per decade across the CONUS (give or take here).....I don't know how you can assert that into snowfall. To me it's more at the mercy of hemispheric nuances that are dictating storm track and temps.  Obviously things don't work linearly in nature. In other words, you can't just say an increase in temps by X-amount means an increase in snowfall by Y-amount. To some degree there likely is an element of AGW...but I remain in the camp that our fortunate run is a result of nuances far beyond AGW. 

[ORH_wxman]

9 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

Boy that's a tough question. If an increase of 1C holds 7% more water vapor and we have been increasing 0.15C-ish per decade across the CONUS (give or take here).....I don't know how you can assert that into snowfall. To me it's more at the mercy of hemispheric nuances that are dictating storm track and temps.  Obviously things don't work linearly in nature. In other words, you can't just say an increase in temps by X-amount means an increase in snowfall by Y-amount. To some degree there likely is an element of AGW...but I remain in the camp that our fortunate run is a result of nuances far beyond AGW. 

Agreed. The increased moisture just is not enough magnitude to explain it. We've had like a 4% increase in WV here since the 1980s. 

There are other factors...and granted, some could still be related to climate change, but perhaps not as directly. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Even bad winters nowadays have close to ‘normal’ snowfall. Sure you get your ratters like 11/12 (though you still get a KU) or last season with practically no sign of winter in DJF but you sandwich two large events in Nov and Mar. It’s just ‘easier’ to make up deficits today then 30/40 years ago, at least it seems that way. It’s obviously a combination of so many things, we can’t figure it out, but it sure does look AGW is a big player.